Comment: Justice unserved

The Maldivian justice system works on a somewhat ‘He who smelt it dealt it’ routine. Criminal law, procedure or policy is drastically lacking, with personal reputation, political affiliation and physical appearance forming the basis for arrest, and in some circumstances: conviction. T

The country relies, heavily, on the two witness rule, lacks any institution dealing with forensic science and allows incompetent judges to interpret the Quran. The word ‘warrant’ does not even exist in the Maldivian criminal dictionary and ‘probable cause’ or ‘rights’ are alien concepts to local police. When one party lodges a complaint with the police, the opposing party immediately takes the role of defendant; being arrested at the police’s pleasure and held for lengthy periods of time without charge. This is what they call the ‘investigation period’ which may only be performed whilst the accused is in custody. Point the finger at someone you claim smelt it and the police will assume he dealt it.

I am not politically affiliated. My cause, more or less, has been the Rule of Law and I am not aware that any government in the Maldives, be it dictatorship or elected has gone a long way to implement it.

Within the first few weeks of being in Hinnavaru as a volunteer teacher, a boy was placed under house arrest by the police for 14 days. This was 2009 and the first democratically elected government was in power. The police claimed the accused had intoxicated a minor and served as judge and jury in convicting him of the crime; even though no witnesses came forward and the minor’s toxicology report was negative.  I screamed bloody murder in the police station; I showed vehemence and flashed a printed copy of my law degree under their noses to no avail. They cared nothing for they believed in the power they possessed.

Months later I, myself, had a brush with the law when I was hauled down to a Male’ police station in a case of domestic disturbance (or so I suppose since I was not told why I was escorted to the station).

Whilst moving from my flat, my boyfriend, who had come over to help me pack, and I made some noise which upset the landlady’s brother. He burst into my room in a rage and held a screwdriver to my boyfriend’s neck. In a twist of events, his sister, my landlady, called the police. My shirtless boyfriend was escorted out of the building by officers and I was asked to come with them to the police station. The treatment offered him and I was vastly different; him being seen as the dark skinned aggressor with yellow eyes and I the British national working at a local TV station.

We were questioned separately, I again waved my printed degree in their faces and we were allowed to leave. Screwdriver boy was never questioned on his role in the incident; his side called the police first, hence he would be the victim evermore.

Some weeks later, whilst I was visiting Hinnavaru, my boyfriend was dragged off to Naifaru jail, under court order, to face charges for a crime; he had, allegedly committed 8 years earlier. The whole case was based on the hear say evidence of young men who claimed my boyfriend had assaulted them. The two boys lodged the complaint against him with the police and also served as the two requisite witnesses in their own case.

The irony was hardly lost on me. I again screamed bloody murder and dragged myself across Male’ spewing words like ‘arbitrary arrest’, ‘statute of limitations’, ‘rule of law’ and ‘reading of rights’. My words were considered worthy of Thilafushi. My boyfriend was exonerated as the witnesses recanted from their earlier statements in court. The Prosecutor could have saved everyone time, money and heartbreak if he had even bothered to check in with his star witnesses.

Recently I started to hear of strange happenings on my old island of Hinnavaru. Boys found on the street after 10pm are arrested, taken over to the local station and coerced into peeing in a cup. They need no warrant and no probable cause. The police has imposed an un-official curfew and breaking it means they have access to fluid from your person. Young boys are arrested every night and this is not hear say. It is on-going.

On 31 July my boyfriend was arrested for allegedly ordering an assault on a young man, who was brutally beaten earlier in the day and hospitalised.

The victim claims that although my boyfriend was not present during the incident, he is sure the attack was ordered by him. In this case he doesn’t even claim that the fart was dealt, but that my boyfriend must have provided the beans. The police did not think to question him as would be customary to do in such a situation, but arrested him and took him over to Naifaru jail. I have no idea how long he will be there or how long this ‘investigation’ will continue.

The worst part is; no matter what the outcome, the trial shall not be held for years to come, but this arrest will hang over his head until such a date. People in the Maldives do not have criminal records; rather they have what is called a ‘police report.’ One may not have a job or travel abroad whilst their police report states they are awaiting trial.

In the Maldives, you are not innocent until proven guilty; you are guilty until the slow machine called the justice system, chugs itself out of the hole it resides in.  I hear the cries of a corrupt judiciary and I find myself nodding in acquiescence for I have seen this corruption. I plead to the government of the day or those incumbent to pay more attention to the Rule of Law, however. Arbitrary arrests, incompetent police officers and mainly the lack of a criminal code are as responsible if not more so for the death of justice.

My favourite time in the Maldives was the month of Ramadan. For this one month, the air was tranquil, gossip at an all time low, children played on the streets into the wee hours of the morning and prejudice desisted. Whether you were an old, gossipy jolifathi lady, a jagah boy, a shop vendor or politician you just got on and enjoyed the month. I hate to think of this month as the month of arrests; it unnerves me.

Lubna Awan was formerly a volunteer teacher on the island of Hinnavaru.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)

MDP MP Ibrahim Rasheed arrested, placed under house arrest

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP for Maafanu South Ibrahim Rasheed ‘Bonda’ has been placed under house arrest for five days by the Criminal Court, following his arrest after midnight on Friday on charges of threatening and attacking a police officer and obstructing police duty.

According to a statement by the formerly ruling MDP, MP Rasheed was taken into custody at 12.30am from a popular cafe in the capital Male’ by “20 militarised police.”

“MP Ibrahim Rasheed was arrested under a warrant obtained by the police relating to an incident two days back on 30 July when it was reported that the MP was ‘bitten’ on his back by a policeman in the process of being arrested while participating in a protest rally,” the statement explained.

“The MP was released within a few hours on that day with two other MPs who were also ‘picked up’ with Hon Rasheed.”

Video footage has since emerged on social media showing MP Rasheed’s arrest on July 30 during an MDP motorbike rally. A riot police officer appears to bite the MP behind his shoulders during the arrest.

Photos surfaced on social media showing bruises on the MPs’ back and the prescription letter from private hospital ADK where he was treated.

Police however released a statement on July 31 denying that any injuries were caused during the arrest of the three MPs.

The police statement insisted that MP Rasheed’s claim to MDP-aligned private broadcaster Raajje TV that he was bitten by a police officer was “a false allegation.”

Police further claimed that the three MDP MPs resisted arrest, used obscene language and caused varying degrees of injury to police officers. Aside from MP Rasheed, MDP MPs Ahmed Easa and Mohamed Gasam were also taken into custody on July 30 (Tuesday).

The statement also accused MP Rasheed of attempting to mislead the public regarding his arrest to bring the Maldives Police Service into disrepute, condemning the MDP MP’s remarks to the media.

Police have also denied reports by Amnesty International alleging “excessive use of force” against MDP demonstrators since the controversial transfer of power on February 7.

The MDP statement meanwhile noted that MP Rasheed was severely beaten by riot police officers on February 8 during a violent crackdown on an MDP march across Male’.

“Hon Rasheed is among 10 MPs who have been the subject of police brutality that have gone unaddressed for the last 6 months in spite of repeated appeals by the Inter Parliamentary Union to investigate the matter,” the MDP statement added.

While no charges have been brought against the Special Operations (SO) officers caught on camera beating MP Rasheed on February 8, the People’s Majlis secretariat sent a letter to the Police Integrity Commission (PIC) requesting the police watchdog body to “speed up its investigation into the cases of violence against MPs on 8 February 2012.”

“The letter also requested the PIC to update the secretariat on the progress of current investigations on this matter,” according to the Majlis.

Meanwhile, the Criminal Court on Friday extended the detention period of former State Minister for Home Affairs Mohamed Mahir Easa by an additional ten days.

Mahir was brought to the Criminal Court at 2:00pm yesterday along with MP Rasheed.

Mahir was arrested on charges of inciting violence against police officers during a speech at the MDP’s ‘Usfasgandu’ protest camp last month. Mahir had said he would not hesitate to cross police barricades to restore the MDP government.

The MDP has called for Mahir’s immediate release arguing that since police possessed both Mahir’s statement and a recording of his speech, there was no reason to keep the former state minister detained.

Mahir was beaten outside the police headquarters on February 7 during the police mutiny at Republic Square.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police failed to state what Nasheed was charged for: former President’s legal team

Ousted President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team on Thursday claimed that the Maldives Police Services had failed to specify what charges Nasheed was being investigated for, after the former President was summoned to police headquarters.

Speaking to local media following the questioning, member of Nasheed’s legal team Hisaan Hussain told local media that even the police gave Nasheed the opportunity to respond to the charges, but despite repeated requests failed to explain exactly what those charges were.

Another member of Nasheed’s legal team, former Minister of Human Resources, Youth and Sports, Hassan Latheef, also made similar comments in a live interview with local TV station Raajje TV, following Nasheed’s appearance in the police station on Thursday.

He said that police did not send Nasheed a formal summoning chit, but instead sent a letter asking him to present himself at police headquarters. Latheef added that police could not have taken action if Nasheed had declined the request, but said that Nasheed wanted to cooperate with the police in their investigation.

Latheef said that during the questioning, police stated that Nasheed was a suspect for perpetrating attacks against police and police property from May 29 onwards, and claimed that all the acts were carried out under Nasheed’s orders.

“But they failed to provide us with any details of the charges. He repeatedly asked them to clarify the details of his wrongs and what damage were they speaking of,” he said.

Furthermore, Latheef said that representatives from both Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) were present in the room, but claimed it was doubtful what police were intending through their presence.

“The Police Integrity Commission and Human Rights Commission of Maldives were present during the investigations. As a principle I agree it is a good thing but why just this case and not others?” he questioned.

He further alleged that the summoning was a “PR stunt” by the police and raised doubts about their intention as to why they had allowed the independent institutions to be present “specifically” for this case.

In a bid to respond the letter sent by the police, Nasheed left to police headquarters on foot from his personal residence ‘Keneryge’ at about 2:00pm last Thursday. A large number of his supporters followed him.

However, police had blocked almost all the routes to police headquarters, and Nasheed was finally able to reach the police headquarters after an hour of waiting.

Police initially refused allow his supporters to pass the police cordon, however the demonstrators insisted that they would not let Nasheed go alone past the police lines.

After a minor confrontation, Nasheed was allowed to enter along with some of his close aides and parliament members, however he still refused to proceed without the presence “of a free media”.

Following the police decision to not cooperate with local TV station Raajje TV, police had sent the station’s reporters back behind the police lines.

Latheef, recalling the event, stated that police informed Nasheed that if he was not present before 3:00pm, they would consider that he had failed to be present for the inquiry.

Nasheed came out of the police headquarters after more than two hours and refused to speak to the local media in the absence of Raajje TV.

However Nasheed later gave an interview to the TV station outside the police lines but did not go into any specific details of the inquiry.

Police response

The police denied the claims of Nasheed’s legal team. In a statement released following the inquiry, police stated that Nasheed refused to answer the questions during the inquiry but instead provided them with his own written statement.

Police claimed Nasheed came to the police headquarters with a band of his supporters, and came to the police headquarters at about 3:00pm after waiting for a long time in the Republican Square.

Police said that when the inquiry began, Nasheed wanted to remain silent until all the questions were asked, and then give a statement based on the questions that were posed to him.

“After [questions were posed], former President Nasheed stated that he wanted to cooperate with the inquiry but declined to provide answers, claiming that the police were not able to inform him of the charges for which he was summoned,” read the statement.

Police in the statement dismissed these claims, stating that the officers conducting the inquiry had repeatedly briefed him about the charges and the laws that were in concern but despite the efforts, Nasheed repeatedly said that it was not clear to him.

Afterwards, police said that Nasheed discussed the matter with his legal team and decided to produce a written statement regarding the questions that were posed to him.

Minivan News tried contacting police media official Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef, but he was not responding at time of press

Charges

Last Monday, Police sent a letter to ousted President Mohamed Nasheed requesting he present himself at police headquarters on August 2 at 10:00am, regarding an investigation into a phone conversation police last week released to the media. The time was later changed to 2:00pm, on Nasheed’s request.

Police claimed that in the phone conversation, tapped and recorded the day police dismantled the Maldivian Democratic Party(MDP) protest camp ‘Usfasgandu’, Nasheed and former MDP Chairperson Mariya Didi discussed attacking police officers.

Police publicised the telephone conversation which they claimed was retrieved with a court order following information from intelligence sources.

Nasheed and Mariya’s leaked audio conversation appears to have been held during the police’s attempt to dismantle the MDP’s protest camp at Usfasgandu on May 29. Police had obtained a search warrant claiming MDP was performing black magic, conducting criminal activity and damaging public property in the area.

In the audio clip, Mariya says: “[Police] are forcing people back! They are using pepper spray! That is why we are unable to hold a national council meeting. And we have also received a second letter, ordering us to vacate the area by ten o’clock tonight. We cannot file an appeal at court or do anything. We cannot even hold the National Council meeting. We won’t have [enough members for] quorum. Shihab is here. But they are using pepper spray and forcing people back. [We] can only vacate the place if we could get in there. This is all very unjust. What shall I do?”

Nasheed then replies, “There’s not much we can do. I don’t know. What is there to do? I think [we] need to get people out to fight if we can get them. If we can get people to fight, get them out. It’s very clear to me; I think we need to fight back, if we can get people to fight. Find kids from Male to fight the police,” Mariya laughs at this point, but Nasheed continues, “That is what I think. I don’t know if we can get people to fight. I want to fight against them.”

Superintendent of Police Abdulla Riyaz at the time said the police had decided to publicise the audio conversation “because we have no other choice.”

Riyaz said Mariya had been summoned for questioning over the audio clip on June 20, but claimed the MDP had spread “baseless allegations” that police were arresting and harassing opposition politicians for no apparent reason. “The time has come to reveal the truth,” Riyaz said.

The audio clip was obtained legally through a court warrant, he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PIC statement “not authorised by me”: PIC President

“I did not authorise the release of the statement”, Police Integrity Commission (PIC) President Shahindha Islmail has said, a day after the police watchdog released a statement dismissing the reports of police brutality and use of excessive force against Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protesters.

Ismail told Minivan News on Thursday that she did not agree with the point which said police had not used excessive force, and therefore provided clear instructions to revise the draft statement to include the unlawful actions of the police observed by the commission.

However, she confirmed that the statement was released on Wednesday while she was on leave and that none of her suggestions were included, except the point that the protests had turned peaceful since July 21.

“As the protests have changed, I told [the commission members], the time had passed for us to comment on it and it was not a good idea to release the statement now condemning the protesters, as it has a possibility of causing further disruption of the peace,” the PIC President observed.

The contentious PIC statement said that police had not used excessive force to disperse the consecutive protests held by the MDP since early July, and that those protests were only broken up following the “removal of police barricades by the protesters and use of loud speakers after midnight ,and attacks against police with coins, pavement bricks, marble, metal pieces, chili water and plastic water bottles.”

“I did not disagree with the points that the protesters threw water bottles and different things that the police. The main thing I disagreed with was the point that police did not use excessive force. From what I have personally witnessed on the TV coverage and is PIC investigations, it is very clear this is not the case,” said Ismail.

She continued, “There have been several occassions when the police obstructed the protests by putting barricades down, despite the fact that the protests were going on in unrestricted areas. This I believe is a clear violation of people’s constitutional right to peaceful assembly.”

Furthermore, she observed that the “police have been acting in a way it seems to provoke the crowds,” Ismail alleged.

“We saw police officers walk into the crowds [protest] several times. Sometimes, it is to bring the barricades taken by the proterstors or to arrest someone. But, some times it is without any reason. I believe it is a form of provocation from the police side.” Ismail explained.

She added that PIC observers had also witnessed police using foul language with the protesters and sometimes against them: “The police stop it once they realise we are commission observers,” she said.

Asked whether the release of statement reflected attempts by the other commission members to override her authority, PIC President responded: “I don’t think of it as overriding my authority, but they are are trying to undermine me.”

She further claimed that the statement was backed by the commission members who seem to be “biased in favour of the police”. She did not name anyone.

As the watchdog body of the police, Shahinda emphasised that PIC should not take sides between the police and the people, and must always prioritise the role of overseeing whether the police actions were within legal boundaries, and if not, provide instructions of what needed to be improved.

“When the PIC failsto inform police what needs to improved, the police officers who are acting unlawfully will see it as an encouragement to ignore the rule and regulations,” Shahinda contended.

Indicating that it was to late to retract the PIC statement, Ismail noted that the “damage is already done” and “police are likely to participate in further unlawful actions.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Protests, roadblocks as Nasheed voluntarily attends police HQ

Former President Mohamed Nasheed attended police headquarters this afternoon, following a request made by police in a letter sent earlier this week.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Youth Wing Leader Aminath Shauna told Minivan News that while the letter was not an official police summons, it accused Nasheed of orchestrating violence against police and vandalism of police property since May 29.

The letter was signed by Deputy Head of Specialist Crime Command, Superintendent Mohamed Riyaz, said Shauna.

She added that Nasheed had decided to attend the station against the advice of both his legal team and the MDP’s National Council, over fears for his safety.

In a statement on July 31, the MDP accused President Mohamed Waheed’s administration of “demonstrating a clear pattern of abuse of power and tactics aimed at removing President Nasheed from the upcoming Presidential race.”

“The letter to summon President Nasheed is baseless and fails to state any specific charges. The letter refers indirectly to attacks on police, vandalising of police property and claims that their observations have led them to believe President Nasheed is responsible for such events,” the party stated.  The MDP added that the work of the Commonwealth-sanctioned Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) into the controversial circumstances surrounding Nasheed’s resignation was ongoing.

“Upon assessment of the facts surrounding the summons, we conclude that this summons is an attempt by the Government to thwart the progress of the Commission of National Inquiry and former President Nasheed’s participation in upcoming elections,” the party said.

“In the absence of any specific criminal charge for which he is being investigated, and since the stated purpose of the summons is merely to question President Nasheed and obtain a written statement from him, we are of the opinion that the only safe course of action will be for President Nasheed to provide a written statement without physically entering the police station.”

The party expressed “extreme concern” for Nasheed’s “personal safety”, observing that he had been “assaulted by the police on various occasions since his resignation from office, and these instances are still being investigated by the Police Integrity Commission.”

Police responded by issuing a statement “to clear the allegations of possible torture, inhumane and degrading treatment by police, raised by the MDP and supporters of Nasheed, after a police summon notice was sent [to the former president].”

“The summon notice is for the investigation of a case lodged against Nasheed for inciting violence against law enforcement official since 29 May 2012. It is suspected that the civil disorder and several physical attacks committed against police officers, and the damages to police vehicles and infrastructures are the outcome of the call by Nasheed to commit such offences,” police stated.

“Thereby, Maldives Police Service has commenced an investigation and the summon notice was issued in furtherance of it, for Nasheed to appear on 02 August 2012 at 1000 hours. However, upon a request made by Nasheed, the time on the summon notice is delayed to 1400 hours on the same day.”

“The Maldives Police Service ensures the safety and security of Nasheed from the moment of his arrival to the police headquarters, and has invited the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives, Police Integrity Commission, and Maldivian Democracy Network (an NGO) to observe police actions during Nasheed’s investigation process. The Human Rights Commission of the Maldives and Police Integrity Commission have accepted this offer.

“[The MPS] assures concerned parties and individuals that whoever is summoned to the police would be treated in accordance with the law; with dignity, respect for human rights and within police code of conduct and code of ethics.”

Protesters gather

Political tensions on the streets of Male’ rose as word spread of the former President’s impending summons.

Protesters initially gathered outside Nasheed’s family of residence, Canaryge, to block any attempts by police to arrest the former President.

However, by early afternoon Nasheed left for police headquarters in the company of his legal team, flanked by several hundred supporters.

After Nasheed entered Republic Square, police barricaded the surrounding streets leading to the large open area.

MDP supporters quickly gathered on the street of Chaandhanee Magu, a busy road full of stores directly aimed at tourists.

Nasheed left police headquarters around 5:40pm, joining more than a thousand cheering supporters gathered at the police barricades near Seagull cafe.

Reporters from the MDP-aligned Raajje TV meanwhile claimed not to have been allowed past police barricades with other media.

Jailhouse diplomacy

Nasheed resigned on February 7 amidst a police and military mutiny, after several weeks of protests by 300-400 opposition supporters over his detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed.

Following his resignation, the Criminal Court quickly issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest, however it was not acted upon by police after MDP supporters gathered outside his family residence.

The same day, police claimed to have discovered bottles of alcohol in the Presidential residence. That case, together with Nasheed’s detention of the judge, was sent to the Prosecutor General (PG)’s Office.

Earlier in July, the PG sent the judge case to Hulhumale’ magistrate court for trial, stating that filing it in the Criminal Court would represent a conflict of interest because it concerned the chief judge. However, the case was returned by the magistrate court, which claimed it was outside its jurisdiction.

Last week, police released a tapped phone conversation in which Nasheed was heard to call for supporters to “fight back” against police, after their dismantling of the party’s protest site at Usfasgandu on charges that the area was being used for the practice of black magic.

The arrest of Nasheed ahead of elections – early or otherwise – appears to be a ‘red line’ for many elements of the international community.

Canadian Foreign Ministry John Baird on July 27 accused the Maldivian government of seeking to arrest its political opponents and eliminate Nasheed’s candidacy in the upcoming election.

Baird, a member of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), noted that “the Maldives has been given the benefit of the doubt by the Commonwealth so far. Continued intimidation, illegal arrests and other authoritarian tactics by the present government may require the Commonwealth to consider a different approach, in our view.”

Maldives Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded by claiming that the Canadian statement was “misleading”, and insisted that “it is the prerogative of the Prosecutor General to decide on whom and when to charge an individual of criminal offence.”

“Now that these institutions are independent, everyone, including our valuable friends in the international community, should be prepared to accept the decisions of these institutions,” the Ministry stated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Suspension of parliament leaves legal void for regulations on freedom of assembly, political parties

Several general regulations without parent legislation, including rules governing political parties and freedom of assembly, will cease to have legal force if an extension is not approved at a parliament sitting before midnight on Sunday, August 5.

Parliament however remains deadlocked and sittings have been suspended indefinitely amidst forced cancellations and escalating political tension.

Prior to the ratification of the new constitution on August 7, 2008, parliament passed a General Regulations Act as parent legislation for over 80 regulations without a statutory basis, or were not formulated under an Act of parliament. These include regulations for criminal justice procedures, companies and finance leasing transactions, insurance, jails and parole, freedom of information and building codes.

Article 271 of the constitution states, “Regulations derive their authority from laws passed by the People’s Majlis pursuant to which they are enacted, and are enforceable pursuant to such lawful authority. Any regulations requiring compliance by citizens must only be enacted pursuant to authority granted by a law enacted by the People’s Majlis.”

The parent act prolonged the lifespan of the regulations – deemed necessary for administrative functions and service provision – for a one year period until new legislation, such as a Criminal Procedures Act, Evidence Act, Freedom of Information Act and Political Parties Act could be enacted.

The act provided for further extensions based on recommendations by parliament’s Rules Committee. The last extension was approved in December 2011 and is set to elapse on August 5, after which the regulations would become null and void.

With the People’s Majlis at a standstill and the outcome of talks between parliamentary group leaders unclear, Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim yesterday warned of an impending “legal void” should the parent act be allowed to expire.

Nazim told newspaper Haveeru that the Act included “two very important regulations” for the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA).

“This problem will become a huge issue,” the People’s Alliance (PA) leader was quoted as saying. “It is therefore of utmost importance that a Majlis sitting is held before Sunday to find a solution. If not, the country will face a big constitutional problem.”

Parliament’s Rules Committee meanwhile met last week and decided to remove six regulations from the General Regulations Act.

According to the Majlis secretariat, the committee also decided to extend the deadline for the remaining regulations to April 2013, following “consideration of legal opinion by the Attorney General’s Office.”

However, article 5(b) of the Act states that extensions must be approved by the Majlis and previous extensions were put for a vote on the floor.

Independent MP for Kulhudhufushi South, Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed, told the local daily today that failure to approve a further extension could disrupt services and raise questions of the legality of government functions.

As the regulations concerned a number of areas and would “directly affect” people from “various fields and arenas”, Nasheed said a sitting of parliament had to be held before Sunday “even for five minutes” to vote to approve an extension.

The formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has meanwhile called for President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and leaders of political parties represented in parliament to come to the negotiating table to resolve the ongoing political dispute.

A statement released by the MDP parliamentary group yesterday contended that in the wake of the “coup d’etat” on February 7, the Maldivian state, constitution, democracy and economy had “come to a halt.”

The party would cooperate with resuming parliament sittings after a compromise agreement is reached through dialogue, the statement said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Difficulties in getting phone call recordings”: Commission of National Inquiry

In a press conference held this morning, members of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) stated they have been having experiencing difficulties in getting the phone call recordings from the Telecommunications Authority (TAM).

However, the members said that the TAM had provided them with the telephone call logs.

“We are having difficulties in getting the phone call recordings. [TAM] does not see the importance of having a [regulation to release call recordings]. Apparently they can’t forward us the call recordings,” Dr Ibrahim Yasir said.

He further said that the CNI has been discussing with TAM on how they could share the recordings.

Speaking in the press conference, co-chair G P Selvam, a retired Singaporian Judge, stated that he was “trying to release a report that all members of the commission agrees to” but said that it was not “something he can promise”.

He also added that CNI will complete its investigation and send its report to the authorities on August 29, but the report would be publicly released on August 30.

Selvam stated that the press conference was the Commission’s final press conference before the release of its findings. It would not state against whom the state should press charges – this was for the Prosecutor General (PG) to decide, he said.

“This is not a criminal investigation, and we don’t have the authority to call on the PG to press charges against specific people,” he said.

Asked if the report would be released in a fashion that would ease the ongoing political tensions, Selvam said the CNI did not need to see what was going on in the current political situation, as its only focus was to see whether the former President Nasheed was toppled illegitimately or not.

“We will not release a timeline, we will release a full report, and the CNI will not consider what may happen after the report is released,” Selvam said.

“We do not want to omit any names, but it may be we will not be able to include all 260 individuals who were interviewed. We will not keep from disclosing any information with the excuse of national interest,” he added.

Dr Ali Fawaz Shareef in the press conference stated that they would release one report, and that there would not be a separate report for the authorities.

He further stated that the commission has already interviewed 269 people, and only 16 people remains to be interviewed.

The members also highlighted that two institutions had not cooperated with the inquiry, but said that in general most institutions were very supportive.

They also highlighted that the commission had received reports published by others, including the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s report on the transfer of power written by two former ministers, Ameen Faisal and Mohamed Aslam.

During the press briefing, the members of the CNI announced that Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF) Major General Ahmed Shiyam had shared his bank statement with the commission.

Shiyam had told the CNI that he had no objection to revealing his account details to the public, and therefore Selvam said that the CNI report would include an attached copy of his bank statement.

“Major General Shiyam has told us that he has no objection to revealing the details of his bank accounts to the public,” Selvam said.

He further added that there were several other notable figures who had agreed to share their bank statements with the commission, but did not reveal their names.

CNI deadline August 29

Initially, the commission was mandated to release its findings on July 31, but CNI members stated that their final report will be delayed, after hundreds of people have come forward offering new information.

CNI Co-chair Selvam at the time said that the new date for the report’s completion would be the end of August, which would be discussed with the government. The original deadline was July 31.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s member on the Commission, Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed, said at the time that 244 people had registered to provide information to the commission following the reforming of the CNI.

“There has been a lot of interest. We will speak to each and every single one,” he said.

The new names joined the 87 spoken to by the government’s original three member panel, taking the total number of contributors to 331.

“That’s one contributor for every 1000 of population,” Saeed remarked.

Following the remarks by the commission, President Mohamed Waheed Hassan extended the deadline by which the CNI must conclude its report into February’s transfer of power by August 30, 2012.

President’s Office confirmed yesterday that Dr Waheed had issued a decree approving the extension of the report’s deadline.  Once complete, the findings are to be submitted to President Waheed, Parliamentary Speaker Abdulla Shahid and the prosecutor general and attorney general.

The first three-member CNI was appointed by President Mohamed Waheed, following a police and military mutiny and Nasheed’s resignation, in what he and his party have described as a coup d’état.

Facing pressure from the Commonwealth and civil society NGOs, the government eventually agreed to reform the commission to include a retired Singaporean judge and a representative for Nasheed.

The former CNI subsequently released a ‘timeline’ into events that took place from January 16 to February 7. The MDP accused the commission of trying to prejudice the work of new commission, and then released its own version of events in response – the ‘Ameen- Aslam’ report based on interviews with the security services. The government described the publication of this report as a “terrorist act”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

GMR presents government with US$1.5 million bill for Q2, as ADC dispute sent for arbitration

An ongoing dispute between Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) developer GMR and the incumbent Maldivian government concerning a US$25 Airport Development Charge (ADC) has been referred to a court of arbitration in Singapore.

The government-owned Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL) faces a US$1.5 million shortfall in concession fees owed to the airport developer for the second quarter of 2012; the legacy of an opposition-sponsored Civil Court case in late 2011 that scuttled the airport’s ability to charge the ADC as stipulated in its concession agreement.

GMR signed a 25 year concession agreement with former President Mohamed Nasheed’s government to upgrade and manage Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA). Under the concession agreement, a US$25 Airport Development Charge (ADC) was to be levied on all outgoing passengers to part-fund the US$400 million development – the country’s single largest private investment.

However, while in opposition, the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), led by Dr Hassan Saeed, now President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s special advisor, and Dr Mohamed Jameel, now Home Minister, filed a successful case in the Civil Court in December 2011 blocking payment of the ADC on the grounds that it was effectively a tax not approved by parliament.

Nasheed’s government as a stopgap measure agreed to deduct the ADC from the concession fees payable by GMR, while it sought to appeal to verdict.

As a result, Dr Waheed’s government received only US$525,355 from the airport for the first quarter of 2012, compared to the US$8.7 million it was expecting, at time the country is facing a crippling budget deficit, a foreign currency shortage, plummeting investor confidence, spiraling expenditure, and a drop off in foreign aid.

According to financial statements sent to MACL and released to local media, in the second quarter of 2012, GMR deducted the ADC revenue of US$7.1 million from total revenues of US$5.6 million, leaving the government with a bill for US$1.5 million.

Managing Director of MACL Mohamed Ibrahim told local newspaper Haveeru that the government would not pay the amount, alleging that GMR’s deduction of the ADC from the revenue was illegal.

In its defence, MACL has said that its board of directors had been reformed with the arrival of the new government, and a decision made to annul the old board’s agreement to deduct the ADC revenue.

The government meanwhile sought to invalidate the GMR contract – and the clause invoking arbitration – by challenging the handling of the bidding process by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a member of the World Bank group and the largest global institution focused on private development sector in developing countries.

“The advisory work was supported by AusAid (Australia), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, and DevCo. DevCo is a multi-donor program affiliated with the Private Infrastructure Development Group and funded by the UK’s Department for International Development, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, the Swedish International Development Agency, and the Austrian Development Agency,” the IFC explained, following a visit by the delegation in June to address the government’s concerns.

Following the first quarter deduction, GMR announced an employee benefits scheme converting 50 percent of employee salaries to US dollars from July onwards, and a one-percent profit-share.

Around the same time, the company sought to compromise with government by offering to exempt Maldivian citizens from paying the ADC. However, the Transport Ministry continued to demand that the infrastructure giant repay the US$8.2 million deducted.

Several pro-government parties – including the Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP), Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP), People’s Alliance (PA) and Jumhoree Party (JP) – meanwhile advised President Waheed that they continued to endorse an agreement signed in June 2010 calling for the airport to be taken back from GMR and nationalised.

The relationship between the airport developer and the government soured further last week after the government temporarily called for a halt to work on the new airport terminal, alleging it had “violated rules and regulations” by not acquiring certain permissions from the Civil Aviation Authority.

“When the government decides that a project be stopped, we will make sure this happens,” President’s Office Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza previously told Minivan News. “GMR have not discussed the construction with relevant authorities.”

Following the second quarter deduction, the airport developer declined to comment, as the matter “has been referred for arbitration by the parties.”

“GMR Male’ International Airport Pvt Ltd has made the said adjustment as per the concession agreement,” a spokesperson said.

The concession agreement includes an option for the government to buy out the contract from the developer, however the cost is likely to reach upwards of several hundred million dollars.

President’s Office Spokespersons Abbas Adil Riza and Masood Imad had not responded at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Word Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) expresses concern over MPL’s “attack” on ports workers

The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) has expressed concern over reports of government owned Maldives Ports Ltd’s (MPL) “infringement of trade union rights and freedoms,” and has called on President Mohamed Waheed Hassan to immediately terminate its “attack” on members and the leadership of the Maldives Ports Workers Union (MPWU).

In a letter on July 23, WFTU General Secretary George Mavikos said the organisation was “deeply concerned” over MPL rights violations.

These included the dismissal of six members of the MPWU, suspension of 49 of its members, reassignment of many ports workers to other ports on different islands and verbal warnings to 27 works and the threats and harassment against the President of MPWU Ibrahim Khaleel.

Khaleel had previously told Minivan News the government company mainly targeted employees who supported the ousted Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).

“They send people with cameras to MDP protests to check which MPL employees take part in the protests,” he said.

Mavikos urged President Waheed “for the immediate termination of this attack against the members and the leadership of the Maldives Ports Workers Union, the reinstatement of the dismissed and suspended workers, the reassignment of the workers in their original working place as well as the termination of the threats against the President of the Union.”

The WFTU is the oldest international trade union organisation with 82 million members in 120 countries, and “struggles against capitalism and imperialism for a society without exploitation of man by man.”

It is also the founder of the International Labor Organisation (ILO). The Maldives became a member of the ILO in May 2009.

The MPWU on July 12 had accused MPL of violating employee rights, alleging the state-owned company had unfairly dismissed six employees due to their political activism.

In his letter to MPL CEO Mahdi Imad, Khaleel said: “Although the constitution guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, it is now common within MPL to stop employees from expressing certain political views, and violate the Employment Act by unfairly dismissing employees and transferring employees to different departments without prior warning or explanation of any offense committed.”

MPL must “respect an employee’s right to exercise freedoms granted in the constitution and by participating in political activities in his or her free time” and must withdraw blocks on “social media including facebook, twitter and gmail,” Khaleel added

In response, Imad in a letter on July 16 accused the MPWU of dividing employees and promoting the interests of a certain political party and threatened to take action against the union.

“We have received reports that the union is attempting to divide employees and promote the interests of a certain political party. Hence, I order and advice you not to do so. If this happens in the future, we will have to take action against you,” he said.

Further, access to social-networking sites had been blocked because they “often propagate un-Islamic, sinful activities and propagate the interests of Jews,” Imad said.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)